I am not sure how the archer system currently works, but here is my two cents worth.
The listed range of the archer unit should be the range where the archer unit should be most effective.
A range 5 unit should be most effective (100%) at range 5.
A range 3 unit should be most effective at range 3.
As enemy troops get closer than their effective range, the ranged units should loose strength.
Two archer units equal in all but range. One range 3 and one range 5.
50/50 50 r3 (unit a)
50/50 50 r5 (unit b)
Round 1
unit a has no enemy in range and moves forward
unit b fires and does max damage. (say 1000)
Round 2
unit a now has enemies at range 3 and fires for max damage (1000)
unit b now has enemies at range 4 and fire for reduced damage (700)
Round 3
enemy troops move forward
unit a now has enemies at range 2 and fire for reduced damage (700)
unit b now has enemies at range 3 and fire for reduced damage (400)
Archers are trained and equipped to work best at their maximum range.
A bow that is made to fire a long distance away is not so good to hit targets that are too close.
Archers that have been trained to hit targets "5 lines" away have specialized in their training for THAT distance. Sure they can hit closer targets, but they are not as effective as those that have been trained to do so.
Morale also plays a part in their effectiveness.
An archer that has been trained and equipped to fire range 5, will not be so confident as they see the enemy moving towards them at range 2.
Whereas a range 3 archer knows that they will face enemy troops in a couple of rounds and is more prepared to deal with range 2 and range 1 encounters.
Range 5 archers are trained and equipped to fight from a distance and should be almost useless in close/melee combat.
Range 3 archers are trained and equipped to fight in closer quarters and should be much better in dealing with enemies that make it through the lines to engage them in close/melee combat.
In today's terms, a sniper with the right rifle is an excellent choice to take out an enemy from a mile away, but 5 guys with handguns standing 10 feet away from him would negate much of his advantage.
Not all archers are the same. Training and equipment gives them different advantages/disadvantages.
Range 5 archers would be equipped with better bows, more arrows and much less (if any) armor (cloth or padded). They may have a dagger handy for defense, but are not prepared to face an enemy close up as the enemy should never be able to reach these troops. The battle should be over before any enemy troops ever reach these range 5 troops.
On the other hand, range 3 units would have mid-grade bows with fewer arrows and more armor (leather or studded - not enough to hinder their archery effectiveness) knowing that they are closer to the front-line. They would also have better melee weapons, say a short sword, knowing that they are likely to have to engage enemy troops in melee.
Range 1-2 troops would essentially be infantry with a few spears each to throw before engaging in melee. These would be heavily armored (chain) with significant melee weapons (long sword, halberd, short sword and dagger...) knowing that they are very likely to face enemy troops in melee battle.
Infantry would of course have the best armor (plate) and the best hand to hand weapons (long sword and dagger, two short swords, mace and shield...)
